Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1887-04-03
reported that one had been drawn and
submitted by Mr.. Architect Mills to the
scale of $4,000 cost, which plan met
their APPRECIATION, and it was

scale OF SOU,OUU cost, WHICH pan met
their appreciation, and it was
Resolred, That a work of the magnitude and
elegance of the courthouse proposed 10 be
built for this city should be under the superin-
tendence Of q irst-rate architect; therefore
the committee who reported the plan OF the
building Is hereby authorized and required 10
contract with such architect The said COM
mittee Is further directed TO receive proposals
for the erection Of the said work from con-
Il factors generally, or from mechanics seVe-
rally, each TO bis trade. and 10 report the pro-
ceedings hereupCn 10 the Hall.
And the said resolution being read,
was on the question put, and agreed to
by the Hall.
June 90, 1914, Mr.. Coleman present
ed an ordinance making an appropria-
ton for the building ESQ, 000).
Ordinance appointing commissioners
to superintend and go on with building
passed February 90, 1916.
Ordinance amending the above passed
April Is, 1916.
On March Is, 1916, it was
Resolred, That the plan for courthouse
made by Mr. Robert Mills and this day submit
ted by the commissioners appointed to super
intend and go on with building courthouse
for the city of Richmond be approved and
adopted by this Han, and that the letter OF Mr..
John Brockenbrough OF this date addressed TO
the president, enclosing that plan. together
with o letter from MIR. Mills referring to the
plan, be preserved by the clerk.
February 16, 1918, an ordinance was
passed to make additional appropria-
ton $3.50, 1000 for the building.
THE NEW COURTHOUSE.
II appears from the records of the
Hastings Court that "by virtue of an
act of Assembly passed the I'd of Febru-
airy, 1918, entitled an act concerning
the Court of Hastings for the city OF
Richmond it is ordered that public
notice be given in this city by publica-
ton in the two daily papers thereof,
that the sessions of this court will in
future be held at the new courthouse
of this city, and that the court be adj
iourned till the new court in course, to
meet at the courthouse aforesaid.
IN USE.
The first meeting of the Common
Hall (CounciD in the new building was
held December 10, 1878; the first ses-
sion of the Hastings Court in the new
building was held December %, 1918.
| On August IA, 1918, an ordinance was
adopted calling the building "City
Hall"
The following is memorandum OF the
app opytatfOas
| June 20. 1874. ........S W.0Oy o.
June 20, 1878. So,OVO "
5000, q
| additional appropriations were made
| Tween December I, 1870, TO July
| l2, 1896, for extra work done on ac-
count Of changes made as suggest
ed by the Hastings Court, &C.,. l7.l5i a
s107,151 4,
March 20, 1876, paid Robert Gamble for lot.
May %, 1916, first payment on account o.
building.
December 1, 1870, nnsl payment Of $1,000
appropriation.
THE CITY HALL TORN DOWN.
The building continued In the use Of
the Council, the city officers, Mayors
Court, Hastings Court, &C., until Gin
view of the disaster at the Capitol q
distrust OF its safety arose. Judge
Guigon caused AN inquiry to be made,
and in the following report the struc-
ture was condemned
| Iron Hastings Court Record, Friday, Febru.
AIRY Q, 1874.
In pursuance Of a special charge Of the hon.
| cradle Judge OF tho Hastings Court OF the city
| Of Richmond, the grand Jury OF said court have
inquired into the condition Of the City Hall, the
| building In which this court and the Chancery
| Court Of the city are held, and IN which The
/ records Of the chancery Court are kept
TWAS in evidence before us that the founda-
! lions Of the bnilding are seriously impaired
| aud are daily growing worse; that tho main
| walls ON every eide are dangerously cracked
teyond remedy; that the western wall IL kept
from falling by only two lk-ineh iron rods
liable 70 be snapped by the sudden displeee-
! ment OF The heavy fimbers OF the dome, which
rest upon very insecure support: and that on
the occurrence Of such an event the greater
| portion Of tho building would becrushed. tx
perts testified that. owing 70 the generally
siiiapidhted condition Of the building and the
peculiar construction OF the clerk'sofiice Of tbs
| Chancefy Court, snid ONCE was not fire-proof
and that II the building were destroyed By fire
IL woald almost certainly involve the loss OF all
the deeds for property, nduciary accoupts
bonds, and other valuable records In the once
Jury we're tho City Engineer and some Of the
An Of these testify, - Will DO seen from the
DE city-iIail building u unsafe; that ths
Court are kept z not oTs-proof, - re9n Ire
sha mat The building IS n such ststo q 40